The requirement for appropriate use of social media has been recognised by the Board of every registered health profession in Australia. For psychologists, the standard of behaviour with respect to the use of social media is found in the profession’s Code of Ethics. 

The Code of Ethics describes social media as, “the online and mobile tools that people use to share opinions, information, experiences, images, and video or audio clips and includes websites and applications used for social networking. Common sources of social media include, but are not limited to, social networking sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn, blogs (personal, professional and those published anonymously), WOMO, True Local and microblogs such as Twitter, content-sharing websites such as YouTube and Instagram, and discussion forums and message boards.”

There have recently been a spate of reports about the way in which some psychologists engage with social media. The debate about the appropriate use of social media has shifted to the conflicted space between the personal and professional spheres.

A psychologist’s use of social media can lead to issues arising even when they are not at work because psychologists remain registered health practitioners at all times. The public trust that a registered health practitioner will work in accordance with established standards of conduct and evidence. Accordingly, the public place a different weighting on the words and views expressed by a registered health practitioner compared to a layperson. With that power comes responsibility. The intentional or unintentional use of this power is problematic when a registered health practitioner expresses a personal view on social media that is contrary or conflicts with the evidence and their profession’s views.

The recent debates around vaccination provide good examples of the way in which the personal views held by some registered health practitioners may not reflect the values of their profession and the standards expected by the community. Practitioners are permitted to hold their own moral position on almost anything. However, when their personal views on a health-related topic conflict with the science or evidence-base that informs their practice then a problem can emerge. That problem may be able to be managed provided the practitioner keeps their view to themselves and does not publicly share it. Specifically, such views should not be posted or shared on social media. As soon as a practitioner publishes their personal views on social media it moves beyond the personal to the public sphere, regardless of the privacy settings

The Psychology Council of NSW is part of the system that regulates psychologists and is primarily concerned with the health and safety of the public. Practitioners are trusted by the public. For this reason, if a practitioner expresses a view that is contrary to the evidence it may cause confusion, seed doubt, and even persuade members of the public to act against the evidence. Therefore, posts expressing personal views can pose risk to the public and thus fall under the jurisdiction of the regulator.

The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) and the National Boards have issued a relevant position statement in response to the pandemic (Registered health practitioners and students and COVID-19 vaccination, 9th March 2021).  This states that ‘Any promotion of antivaccination statements or health advice which contradicts the best available scientific evidence or seeks to actively undermine the national immunisation campaign (including via social media) is not supported by National Boards and may be in breach of the code of conduct and subject to investigation and possible regulatory action’.

The regulator recognises that health practitioners are individuals with their own personal views on many matters. When it comes to sharing those views with others, social media can be a powerful and effective tool. However, registered health practitioners must be aware that they have obligations that other members of society do not, and that those obligations continue whether the practitioner is or is not at work. As registered health practitioners, psychologists should reflect on the areas in which their own views may conflict with the medical evidence and then think twice before they share those views on social media.

Gail Purkis
President